Danger definitely isn't the weakest of them all.  It's right between them in terms of hook, but way more shape than either of the previous ones.  Instead of being really smooth, it's super super clean and almost sharp.  I figured out what it's good at now, and it's really really good at it, but the good and bad news is that it doesn't act like a Dare Devil.  It's the perfect compliment to the other two, but doesn't feel like it should say Dare Devil on the ball at all. 

I went ahead and ordered the Danger online last night before league because I had some free amazon credits to pay for most of it. They claim it shipped today and a UPS tag was generated. It would be cool to get it by Black Friday!

I did a lot of research on it, and concluded that it's the weakest of em all but it should have a little more movement in the back which is all I'm looking for. Tough choice between the Danger and OG version, but the Trick works so well for me that I leaned towards the Hybrid.

I used my Trick last night for all 3 games in scratch league and it really worked well for me and was very impressive. I could sure use the Danger if my research says it is what I think it well be.

Thanks to all for the pre analysis of the ball!

Quote from: Luke Rosdahl on November 20, 2017, 07:54:08 AM

Danger definitely isn't the weakest of them all.  It's right between them in terms of hook, but way more shape than either of the previous ones.  Instead of being really smooth, it's super super clean and almost sharp.  I figured out what it's good at now, and it's really really good at it, but the good and bad news is that it doesn't act like a Dare Devil.  It's the perfect compliment to the other two, but doesn't feel like it should say Dare Devil on the ball at all. 

I would argue that that makes it the weakest. Strength should be measured from front to back, not side to side. Clean with back end is actually a weak bowling ball. 

It's all opinion on strength. I see strength as the amount of oil capability

Quote from: JazlarVonSteich on November 20, 2017, 10:07:44 AM

Quote from: Luke Rosdahl on November 20, 2017, 07:54:08 AM

Danger definitely isn't the weakest of them all.  It's right between them in terms of hook, but way more shape than either of the previous ones.  Instead of being really smooth, it's super super clean and almost sharp.  I figured out what it's good at now, and it's really really good at it, but the good and bad news is that it doesn't act like a Dare Devil.  It's the perfect compliment to the other two, but doesn't feel like it should say Dare Devil on the ball at all. 

I would argue that that makes it the weakest. Strength should be measured from front to back, not side to side. Clean with back end is actually a weak bowling ball. 

It's all opinion on strength. I see strength as the amount of oil capability

Well that too. But generally speaking, most heavy oil balls are not covering a ton of boards. They are digging in sooner and, most often, smoother. In terms of the Danger, I see no way that it is stronger than either of the other two. The core is the same (isn't it?) and it uses a weaker cover than either of the other balls. Therefore, it should be weaker. And having seen it go down the lane in person, plus seeing Luke's video, it definitely looks weaker to me.

And I know that, friction flips the script, it can make weaker balls with quicker responses look like they hook more than technically more aggressive balls.  For me anyway the Danger is stronger than the original.  I used the Danger for most of the weekend out of town at two other different houses.  My home house shot has changed somewhat and is actually on the heavier side of medium now, I can use my Intense comfortably there.  I used my original Dare Devil quite a bit and already have a few dozen games on my Danger now.  I still think it's stronger no matter what the chart says.  That may sound ignorant, but Schlemer also said the cover on the Danger is also a bit stronger than the Hywire cover, which would also buck the chart, not to mention HP literally stands for hook potential and the HP2 line completely throws that out the window everytime a ball comes out in that line lol. 

I get what you're saying, I just absolutely swear the Danger has more traction in oil for me at least than the original.  My Match Up Pearl also shapes like urethane, so my experience may not necessarily reflect the majority either.  I think I still have some OG Dare Devil footage on the computer so I may go back and check it out, but the shot I was on for the OG was considerably drier, so may not be able to draw a good comparison, plus my rev rate has dropped since then.  Oh well.  This wouldn't be the first time it's been different for me, and likely not the last. 

Quote from: Luke Rosdahl on November 20, 2017, 11:06:09 AM

I'm not measuring it side to side, hook and backend are two different things.  It also has more traction in oil than the original, which is longer and smoother.  Just because something goes long doesn't also mean it's clean.  The Danger is both earlier and stronger off friction than the original, what makes it clean is how defined the motion is.  Easy through the heads, strong on friction.  The DD is easy down the lane too, goes further, and is smoother.  It's clean-ish, but the ball motion all kind of blends together.  I'd argue the Sure Lock is pretty clean too, and it's the most aggressive ball on the market, so apparently our definitions of clean are pretty different. 

I just don't see it with the Danger. I have seen it now in person from a local staffer, and it looks weaker than the original for sure. I just don't see how it can possibly be earlier than the DD with that cover. As I said previously, the RG chart would have to be wrong then. You've said before that your house shot is on the lighter oil side. I can see it being more responsive off the friction, but it's not going to handle the oil as well. This makes it weaker. We have to account for the conditions as well as ball motion.

I have my Sure Lock drilled 4x4x1 and I would say that it is clean for being an aggressive ball, but nowhere as clean as some of the other balls in the Storm/RG family. It's also not super quick off the spot either. I've used it on short sport patterns with success because of it.

You probably have it right with that last statement, might just be a case of being different for different people. 

Quote from: Luke Rosdahl on November 21, 2017, 10:15:17 AM

And I know that, friction flips the script, it can make weaker balls with quicker responses look like they hook more than technically more aggressive balls.  For me anyway the Danger is stronger than the original.  I used the Danger for most of the weekend out of town at two other different houses.  My home house shot has changed somewhat and is actually on the heavier side of medium now, I can use my Intense comfortably there.  I used my original Dare Devil quite a bit and already have a few dozen games on my Danger now.  I still think it's stronger no matter what the chart says.  That may sound ignorant, but Schlemer also said the cover on the Danger is also a bit stronger than the Hywire cover, which would also buck the chart, not to mention HP literally stands for hook potential and the HP2 line completely throws that out the window everytime a ball comes out in that line lol. 

I get what you're saying, I just absolutely swear the Danger has more traction in oil for me at least than the original.  My Match Up Pearl also shapes like urethane, so my experience may not necessarily reflect the majority either.  I think I still have some OG Dare Devil footage on the computer so I may go back and check it out, but the shot I was on for the OG was considerably drier, so may not be able to draw a good comparison, plus my rev rate has dropped since then.  Oh well.  This wouldn't be the first time it's been different for me, and likely not the last. 

I did go back and watch your DD video because I really wanted to see for myself. It DOES look like you are probably correct with what you have been saying, but that depends on all those factors you mentioned. Tamer's video also suggests that the Danger fits in between, although to be honest - despite him raving about it - I did not like how his ball was getting to the pocket in the video.

I just know that I was originally all in for any hybrid version that came out. Then I was mostly out once I started seeing the "facts" about it. Then I saw it in the hands of the local staffer this past weekend and I kept telling her I was going to steal it. It just looked really clean going down lane. It made a nice move, but not super jumpy. Based on seeing her throw the original - which I got to witness again during a weekend tournament (we were on the same pair) - the original still looks earlier and a little smoother to me. But I would have to also examine her layouts and see the surface. The Danger was at box, I believe, and I know what that does to most balls out of Utah...

I guess it comes back to the same discussions between the Intense and the Code Red - which includes the video with the pros, people are seeing different reactions between them. Some have the Intense stronger and some the Code Red. Seems to be the same with the Daredevils. I guess I will just have to drill one up and see.